SCOTUS Holds that AIA Did Not Change the Scope of the On-Sale Bar

Goodwin
Contact

On January 22, 2019, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Helsinn Healthcare v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, holding that under § 102(a), as amended by the American Invents Act (“AIA”), an inventor’s sale of an invention to a third party who is obligated to keep the invention confidential could still place the invention “on sale” for purposes of the statutory on-sale bar. The Supreme Court explained that under “settled pre-AIA precedent on the meaning of ‘on sale,’” the Federal Circuit “has long held that ‘secret sales’ can invalidate a patent.” Interpreting § 102(a) as amended, the Supreme Court ruled the scope of the on-sale bar did not change, because Congress re-enacted the same “on sale” language that appeared in pre-AIA § 102(a). Although the AIA added a catchall phrase “or otherwise available to the public” to § 102(a), the Supreme Court found that it was “simply not enough of a change for [it] to conclude that Congress intended to alter the meaning of the reenacted term ‘on-sale.’” It held that “the phrase ‘on-sale’ had acquired a well-settled meaning when the AIA was enacted,” and declined “to read the addition of a broad catchall phrase to upset that body of precedent.”

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Goodwin | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Goodwin
Contact
more
less

Goodwin on:

Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
- hide
- hide